3 cheers for the second amendment..... - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-14-2010, 02:56 AM   #31
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 06:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maycocksean View Post
I'd follow that with some Saipan eye candy in retort but. . .

I don't live there any more and nothing in Columbus, Ohio, sadly, can compete with that.

That was the life, man. I'm telling you.
You mean the mud brown Olentangy river isn't doing it for you?
__________________

__________________
indra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 02:56 AM   #32
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.


~Thomas Jefferson
This was true for the 1700's after the colonies declared independence from Britain and drafted the constitution to protect themselves from ever having their newly-won freedoms curtailed.

Needless to say, a lot has happened in the centuries since, and some aspects of the constitution need to be brought up to date by virtue of the times that we live in - including the first amendment, second amendment, and fourth amendment.
__________________

__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 04:13 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 06:39 AM
So which particular changes would you make to the first and fourth amendments?
__________________
BonosSaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 04:38 AM   #34
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 02:39 AM
repeal all that crap

I know it is a dangerous thought, the govment might start to board soldiers in your house,

Quote:
Amendment 3 - Quartering of Soldiers. Ratified 12/15/1791. Note

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
if someone claims you own them $20, demand a jurt trial.

Quote:
Amendment 7 - Trial by Jury in Civil Cases. Ratified 12/15/1791.

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 07:58 AM   #35
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 04:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by nathan1977 View Post
Huh. Second time in two days that's been said here in FYM. Maybe we should just hit the reset button on the whole thing. Because, you know, nothing the Founding Fathers said is applicable today. Except for the stuff we agree with.

And for the record -- the Founding Fathers didn't foresee assault weapons in the hands of gang bangers, a license to own and operate a gun is not the same thing as barring gun ownership, and neither is a background check.
The Founding Fathers didn't foresee assault weapons, period. They didn't foresee a gun culture that was spinning out of control. Hell they couldn't even foresee the fact that the government's weaponry and the citizen's weaponry would one day be comparable to a cannon vs a stick.

BUT, the Founding Fathers did know that they were not absolute and that the constitution would evolve, it was designed to do so.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 08:51 AM   #36
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BonosSaint View Post
So which particular changes would you make to the first and fourth amendments?
Well, I would amend the first amendment in such a way that would prevent horrible spectacles like protesters shouting abuse and curses at military funerals - I think that's absolutely appalling and should be outlawed. There's a time and place for protesting, but not when the family is grieving for their fallen child who died defending his country.

As for the fourth amendment:
I would change it to allow ALL materials seized at a crime scene to be admitted into evidence, regardless if they were obtained with a search warrant or not. For example: if a cop stops a guy, opens his car trunk and finds a dead body in there, it's ludacris that it can't be used as evidence because he didn't obtain a search warrant to search the car.

Also, I believe that all dangerous criminals (i.e., murderers and rapists of children, etc), should not have any constitutional rights at all. They broke the law so there is no justification for the law to protect them.
__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 09:04 AM   #37
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 04:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
Well, I would amend the first amendment in such a way that would prevent horrible spectacles like protesters shouting abuse and curses at military funerals - I think that's absolutely appalling and should be outlawed. There's a time and place for protesting, but not when the family is grieving for their fallen child who died defending his country.
Most military families would disagree with you. Their family member fought for that right, just because you don't like what they say doesn't mean it should be banned. If that were the case why not ban all Tea Partiers and Fox News?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
As for the fourth amendment:
I would change it to allow ALL materials seized at a crime scene to be admitted into evidence, regardless if they were obtained with a search warrant or not. For example: if a cop stops a guy, opens his car trunk and finds a dead body in there, it's ludacris that it can't be used as evidence because he didn't obtain a search warrant to search the car.
He needs to have reason to open the trunk. Period. He doesn't need a warrant, just probable cause, speeding is not probable cause. The abuses that would occur if this were not in place would be harmful to justice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
Also, I believe that all dangerous criminals (i.e., murderers and rapists of children, etc), should not have any constitutional rights at all. They broke the law so there is no justification for the law to protect them.
What? So you're saying after they are found guilty they really should just be killed, right?
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 10:38 AM   #38
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 04:39 AM
Heh

Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
if a cop stops a guy, opens his car trunk and finds a dead body in there, it's ludacris
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 10:53 AM   #39
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Most military families would disagree with you. Their family member fought for that right, just because you don't like what they say doesn't mean it should be banned. If that were the case why not ban all Tea Partiers and Fox News?
Hi BVS,
I didn't say it should be banned altogether....I said that it shouldn't be allowed during the funeral. I have no problem with protesting - but there's a time and place. I'm sure the soldier didn't fight for the right of his family to be jeered at and cursed and he certainly didn't fight for the right to be called a killer.


Quote:
He needs to have reason to open the trunk. Period. He doesn't need a warrant, just probable cause, speeding is not probable cause. The abuses that would occur if this were not in place would be harmful to justice.
If in the course of the traffic stop the cop becomes suspicious and opens the trunk and finds a dead body in there, which solves a 20 year old unsolved crime,it should be allowed into evidence. It's insane to let a killer off on a technicality like that.

Quote:
What? So you're saying after they are found guilty they really should just be killed, right?
You've known my position on the death penalty for many years now and you know that I'm all for it.

In the case of BTK, Timothy McVeigh, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and John Couey (who already died) - hell yeah!! What rights do they deserve after they butchered countless innocent people for no good reason? Why did they deserve any consideration at all? What consideration did they give their victims? What right did John Couey give little Jessica when he buried her alive after raping her? what right did BTK give the Ortega family after he slaughtered them senselessly? What right did Tim McVeigh have after blowing up over 100 innocent people (including children). The law should not protect criminals like that.

So yes, absolutely - after proven and found guilty they should be executed without right of appeal.
__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 10:54 AM   #40
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post


yo bro' I'm down widdat man...y'know what I'm sayin'?
__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 11:09 AM   #41
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Here is a perfect case in point about someone deserving to be tarred and feathered and hung up by the balls....

Police say 2-year-old killed for crying during World Cup - Game On!: Covering the Latest Sports News
__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 11:25 AM   #42
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 04:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
Hi BVS,
I didn't say it should be banned altogether....I said that it shouldn't be allowed during the funeral. I have no problem with protesting - but there's a time and place. I'm sure the soldier didn't fight for the right of his family to be jeered at and cursed and he certainly didn't fight for the right to be called a killer.
So it should only be banned at funerals?



Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
If in the course of the traffic stop the cop becomes suspicious and opens the trunk and finds a dead body in there, which solves a 20 year old unsolved crime,it should be allowed into evidence. It's insane to let a killer off on a technicality like that.
Well like I said, he/she needs probable cause. Not just a hunch. If we allowed "suspicion" to guide our justice what would stop anti-semetic cops from searching vehicles only because they're Jewish?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
You've known my position on the death penalty for many years now and you know that I'm all for it.
That doesn't answer the question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
In the case of BTK, Timothy McVeigh, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and John Couey (who already died) - hell yeah!! What rights do they deserve after they butchered countless innocent people for no good reason? Why did they deserve any consideration at all? What consideration did they give their victims? What right did John Couey give little Jessica when he buried her alive after raping her? what right did BTK give the Ortega family after he slaughtered them senselessly? What right did Tim McVeigh have after blowing up over 100 innocent people (including children). The law should not protect criminals like that.
You're reacting by emotion. You can't write law based on emotion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AchtungBono View Post
So yes, absolutely - after proven and found guilty they should be executed without right of appeal.
And if they were actually innocent? You do realize there have been successful appeals that have freed innocent men, right? If we had your type of justice you would have killed an innocent man.
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 11:35 AM   #43
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 04:39 AM
If we want to discuss the death penalty, lets keep it to a separate thread.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 12:06 PM   #44
Refugee
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tel-Aviv, Israel
Posts: 1,300
Local Time: 10:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
So it should only be banned at funerals?
I'm saying that people should be considerate of other people's feelings. It would be so wrong for me to go into your house (if you were in mourning G-d forbid) and start slandering and cursing your loved one, don't you think so?


Quote:
Well like I said, he/she needs probable cause. Not just a hunch. If we allowed "suspicion" to guide our justice what would stop anti-semetic cops from searching vehicles only because they're Jewish?
If I have nothing to hide then the police are more than welcome to open my trunk, even if it's just to bust my chops. But if I'm hiding weapons or drugs and I get busted - that's MY problem and I'm not going to claim my rights were violated because I WAS caught committing a crime.

Quote:
That doesn't answer the question.

You're reacting by emotion. You can't write law based on emotion.
Of course you can, otherwise rapists and murderers would get off with a 100 dollar dine and that's it. Of course outrage is a factor in judgments - that's only logical.

Quote:
And if they were actually innocent? You do realize there have been successful appeals that have freed innocent men, right? If we had your type of justice you would have killed an innocent man.
Yes I know that innocent people have been freed after having been convicted. I'm talking about a criminal who was proven guilty by EVERY means and with no doubt whatsoever: DNA doesn't lie...it can convict a man or exonerate him. If a vicious criminal is convicted on irrefutable(sp?) evidence then by all means execute him.
__________________
AchtungBono is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2010, 12:08 PM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
unico's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rage Ave.
Posts: 18,747
Local Time: 05:39 AM
I can't believe this bullshit loophole still exists.
Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence : Media
__________________

__________________
unico is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com